4 ms·
> Vulkan is nice, but it goes into the other extreme. It's very low level and designed for advanced users. Even getting anything on the screen in Vulkan is inti
by Teknoman117 4y ago
> Vulkan is nice, but it goes into the other extreme. It's very low level and designed for advanced users. Even getting anything on the screen in Vulkan is intimidating because you have to write everything from scratch.
I honestly believe that this is the major reason. Developing a hobby project with OpenGL is little more than using SDL or GLFW to get a window with a GLContext and then you can just start calling commands. Vulkan is much more complicated and unless you're really pushing performance limits, you're not getting much of a benefit for the extra headache.
- gary_0 4y agoOpenGL is what you use if you just want to render some triangles on the GPU with a minimum of hassle on the most platforms (which is quite a few if you include GLES, WebGL, and ANGLE). Most people aren't writing graphics engines for AAA games so OpenGL is all they need.
- astrange 4y agoIt's a difficult API to do that with; it's as imperative and state based as you could possibly be and the error handling isn't exactly good. Surely there's easier cross platform libraries for it now.
- Teknoman117 4y agoI think that still falls under more than "putting a few triangles on the screen". If you're doing anything advanced with OpenGL, yeah, debugging it is a pain and the statefulness isn't fun. But if all you're doing is trying to put some textured quads (two triangles) on the screen and you're not wrangling multiple framebuffers, there's not much to go wrong.